FanPost

Situational Box Score - Michigan Preview

You can follow me on twitter:

I don't have the time to review the Gonzaga game, but it was a nice win that will pay greater dividends down the line past this year. It also shows that if a team's games are less than "competitive" your stats are less than useful without serious adjustments. Let's look at the Michigan and Florida State Elite 8 matchup.

I switched back to separating offensive rebounds as their own category of possessions, it was making the late clock offense look ridiculously efficient by points per possession metrics, which just generally does not seem to be true without offensive rebounds.

For the purposes of this exercise, it's a simple basis preference and if anyone wants it, just ask.

Possessions by Time Interval
(Transition 0-10 sec., Mid-Clock 11-20 sec., Late Clock 20+ sec.)

Teams by
Time Interval
P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Total Offense

2588

0.944

2443

46.3%

52.4%

514

846

60.8%

122

349

35.0%

225

664

33.9%

496

726

68.3%

400

15.5%

448

52.0%

224

38

186

Transition Initial FGA
+ TOs
842 1.027 865 51.4% 56.8% 208 310 67.1% 23 66 34.8% 62 194 32.0% 217 322 67.4% 122 14.5% 172 58.7% 112 9 51
Mid-Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
995 0.889 885 43.9% 50.2% 170 293 58.0% 58 161 36.0% 91 272 33.5% 156 230 67.8% 165 16.6% 163 51.1% 68 20 75
Late Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
751 0.923 693 44.2% 50.6% 136 243 56.0% 41 122 33.6% 72 198 36.4% 123 174 70.7% 113 15.0% 113 45.4% 44 9 60
Offensive Rebounds Total 355 1.124 399 53.3% 59.4% 99 164 60.4% 13 41 31.7% 33 67 49.3% 76 113 67.3% 30 8.5% 44 30.3% 16 2 26

Opponents of

Florida State

Total Offense

2597

0.882

2291

42.4%

49.2%

367

728

50.4%

174

452

38.5%

255

698

36.5%

444

621

71.5%

436

16.8%

380

47.7%

145

42

193

Transition Initial FGA
+ TOs
709 0.994 705 48.1% 55.6% 123 215 57.2% 31 76 40.8% 70 175 40.0% 187 256 73.0% 125 17.6% 117 52.2% 55 10 52
Mid-Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
984 0.825 812 40.4% 47.0% 128 272 47.1% 67 177 37.9% 94 266 35.3% 140 201 69.7% 177 18.0% 141 48.8% 52 15 74
Late Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
904 0.856 774 40.6% 47.1% 116 241 48.1% 76 199 38.2% 91 257 35.4% 117 164 71.3% 134 14.8% 122 43.1% 38 17 67
Offensive Rebounds Total 358 0.972 348 45.9% 50.8% 65 135 48.1% 31 59 52.5% 26 72 36.1% 78 107 72.9% 40 11.2% 34 27.9% 6 7 21

Teams by
Time Interval
P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Total Offense

2679

1.001

2682

46.9%

54.8%

522

806

64.8%

119

370

32.2%

326

887

36.8%

422

637

66.2%

325

12.1%

527

54.5%

206

37

284

Transition Initial FGA
+ TOs
680 1.174 798 57.3% 65.4% 179 240 74.6% 15 42 35.7% 77 191 40.3% 179 266 67.3% 80 11.8% 171 63.1% 97 4 70
Mid-Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
891 0.967 862 45.7% 54.4% 150 241 62.2% 46 135 34.1% 121 318 38.1% 107 168 63.7% 122 13.7% 177 55.8% 53 18 106
Late Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
1108 0.922 1022 42.3% 49.4% 193 325 59.4% 58 193 30.1% 128 378 33.9% 136 203 67.0% 123 11.1% 179 47.2% 56 15 108
Offensive Rebounds Total 301 1.183 356 55.7% 62.9% 80 121 66.1% 18 34 52.9% 34 82 41.5% 58 80 72.5% 31 10.3% 46 34.8% 9 6 31

Opponents of
Michigan

Total Offense

2685

0.863

2317

43.1%

48.2%

450

779

57.8%

197

584

33.7%

198

596

33.2%

429

600

71.5%

458

17.1%

379

44.9%

178

54

147

Transition Initial FGA
+ TOs
674 0.887 598 43.9% 48.1% 129 194 66.5% 32 96 33.3% 39 166 23.5% 159 231 68.8% 113 16.8% 98 49.0% 60 12 26
Mid-Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
1123 0.873 980 45.0% 50.6% 188 329 57.1% 90 266 33.8% 92 227 40.5% 148 214 69.2% 202 18.0% 180 48.6% 75 30 75
Late Clock Initial FGA
+ TOs
888 0.832 739 40.4% 45.3% 133 256 52.0% 75 222 33.8% 67 203 33.0% 122 155 78.7% 143 16.1% 101 36.7% 43 12 46
Offensive Rebounds Total 304 1.023 311 52.2% 55.1% 85 128 66.4% 20 50 40.0% 13 48 27.1% 62 89 69.7% 37 12.2% 30 25.4% 14 5 11

Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Transition Total

766

1.014

777

50.6%

56.3%

176

269

65.4%

23

63

36.5%

58

176

33.0%

205

306

67.0%

110

14.4%

163

104

9

50

Braian Angola Transition 132 1.098 145 43.5% 51.1% 24 46 52.2% 2 7 28.6% 14 39 35.9% 51 59 86.4% 17 12.9% 29 21 3 5
CJ Walker Transition 131 0.740 97 37.8% 44.6% 17 36 47.2% 1 5 20.0% 10 33 30.3% 31 41 75.6% 19 14.5% 36 23 2 11
Trent Forrest Transition 124 0.952 118 66.1% 66.9% 35 52 67.3% 3 4 75.0% 1 3 33.3% 39 68 57.4% 18 14.5% 44 25 0 19
Terance Mann Transition 105 1.143 120 64.9% 65.5% 40 50 80.0% 7 16 43.8% 1 8 12.5% 23 40 57.5% 18 17.1% 28 19 2 7
Phil Cofer Transition 88 1.023 90 48.4% 50.8% 22 31 71.0% 5 11 45.5% 3 20 15.0% 27 43 62.8% 10 11.4% 7 4 0 3
M.J. Walker Transition 69 1.000 69 41.2% 51.0% 10 17 58.8% 1 5 20.0% 10 29 34.5% 17 23 73.9% 11 15.9% 9 4 1 4
PJ Savoy Transition 37 1.405 52 47.4% 65.8% 4 5 80.0% 0 2 0.0% 14 31 45.2% 2 3 66.7% 4 10.8% 5 3 1 1
Mfiondu Kabengele Transition 36 1.222 44 48.3% 55.2% 9 13 69.2% 1 5 20.0% 4 11 36.4% 12 14 85.7% 4 11.1% 1 1 0 0
Christ Koumadje Transition 20 1.000 20 56.3% 56.3% 7 10 70.0% 2 6 33.3% 0 0 0.0% 2 8 25.0% 3 15.0% 0 0 0 0
Ike Obiagu Transition 19 0.895 17 80.0% 80.0% 7 8 87.5% 1 2 50.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 7 14.3% 6 31.6% 1 1 0 0
Brandon Allen Transition 5 1.000 5 66.7% 83.3% 1 1 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 2 50.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 2 0 0
Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Transition Total

626

1.184

741

58.2%

66.6%

164

221

74.2%

15

39

38.5%

73

173

42.2%

164

250

65.6%

75

12.0%

161

92

4

65

Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman Transition 126 0.992 125 46.3% 55.0% 20 33 60.6% 3 9 33.3% 14 38 36.8% 37 52 71.2% 11 8.7% 43 23 1 19
Charles Matthews Transition 104 1.125 117 63.5% 67.6% 36 51 70.6% 5 7 71.4% 6 16 37.5% 17 38 44.7% 15 14.4% 14 4 1 9
Zavier Simpson Transition 73 1.068 78 66.7% 67.9% 23 30 76.7% 2 4 50.0% 1 5 20.0% 25 44 56.8% 9 12.3% 34 25 1 8
Duncan Robinson Transition 69 1.565 108 58.3% 74.2% 15 20 75.0% 1 5 20.0% 19 35 54.3% 19 21 90.5% 6 8.7% 16 10 0 6
Jordan Poole Transition 60 1.217 73 54.5% 65.9% 14 18 77.8% 0 3 0.0% 10 23 43.5% 15 18 83.3% 13 21.7% 6 4 0 2
Moritz Wagner Transition 59 1.593 94 67.4% 80.2% 17 20 85.0% 1 2 50.0% 11 21 52.4% 25 31 80.6% 6 10.2% 7 4 0 3
Isaiah Livers Transition 33 1.394 46 57.6% 65.2% 13 17 76.5% 1 3 33.3% 5 13 38.5% 3 4 75.0% 4 12.1% 3 1 0 2
Eli Brooks Transition 22 0.682 15 33.3% 33.3% 4 6 66.7% 0 1 0.0% 0 5 0.0% 7 10 70.0% 2 9.1% 8 2 1 5
Jaaron Simmons Transition 22 1.136 25 66.7% 73.3% 8 9 88.9% 0 1 0.0% 2 5 40.0% 3 5 60.0% 2 9.1% 8 5 0 3
Jon Teske Transition 21 1.143 24 80.0% 80.0% 7 8 87.5% 1 2 50.0% 0 0 0.0% 8 16 50.0% 2 9.5% 2 1 0 1
Ibi Watson Transition 17 1.118 19 40.0% 53.3% 1 3 33.3% 1 2 50.0% 4 10 40.0% 3 6 50.0% 0 0.0% 4 2 0 2
Xavier Simpson Transition 16 0.813 13 100.0% 110.0% 4 4 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 2 5 40.0% 4 25.0% 16 11 0 5

Note: Michigan Offense is on the Left and Michigan Defense is on the right. For ease of comparison, I have flipped the FSU offense and defense so that if you look at both transition shot charts on the left hand side, you're comparing the Michigan offense and the FSU defense, and the Michigan Defense to the Florida State Offense for the right hand side.

Transition
Florida State: 32.5% O, 27.3% D
Michigan: 25.3% O, 25.1% D

  • Led by Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman and his 125 points (20 transition layups or dunks and 14 transition three pointers.) He had no problem sharing the wealth, dishing out 43 assists in transition (23 at the rim, 19 from deep)
  • Michigan scored 29 % of their points on initial field goal attempts in transition from 3, while shooting 40.3% (60.5% eFG%)
  • Charles Matthews leads the team in transition layups and dunks with 36 on the year on 76.7% shooting at the rim but he is a real liability at the line with a 17/38 FT performance in transition
  • Duncan Robinson leads Michigan with 19 transition three pointers made while shooting 54.3% (81.5% eFG%), with 58.3% of his attempts being 3’s in transition. He also shot 15/20 at the rim and 19/21 at the line in transition. That’s a key player to keep in check.
  • Michigan also has two other shooters double digit transition 3’s, Jordan Poole (10/23 or 43.5%, 65.2% eFG%) and Moritz Wagner (11/21 or 52.3%, 78.5% eFG%)
  • FSU is led in transition with Braian Angola’s 145 points in transition, with 35% of those coming at the line. These also include end of game FTs, which can add up, but he has otherwise done just fine with 14 transition 3’s on 36% (54% eFG%) shooting from 3.
  • PJ Savoy has come on strong late with 82% of his transition attempts being 3’s and hitting 45.2% of them (67.8% eFG%) Playing catchup to finish the year right, I respect the hustle
  • Terance Mann and Trent Forrest lead the Noles in breakaways with 40 and 35 layups or dunks in transition on 74% shooting for the pair.
  • CJ Walker and Trent Forrest lead the team in transition assists, with 36 and 44 assists respectively.
Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Mid-Clock Total

868

0.947

822

45.4%

52.3%

147

248

59.3%

55

146

37.7%

89

247

36.0%

151

222

68.0%

143

16.5%

155

62

20

73

Terance Mann Mid-Clock 130 1.008 131 52.7% 55.9% 33 44 75.0% 10 30 33.3% 6 19 31.6% 27 37 73.0% 16 12.3% 26 9 3 14
Phil Cofer Mid-Clock 127 1.354 172 48.9% 58.3% 26 44 59.1% 14 36 38.9% 25 53 47.2% 17 22 77.3% 12 9.4% 4 2 1 1
Braian Angola Mid-Clock 127 0.819 104 36.3% 44.5% 13 25 52.0% 5 18 27.8% 15 48 31.3% 23 30 76.7% 23 18.1% 38 16 6 16
Mfiondu Kabengele Mid-Clock 92 0.935 86 51.6% 53.2% 22 29 75.9% 8 26 30.8% 2 7 28.6% 20 39 51.3% 13 14.1% 5 2 0 3
M.J. Walker Mid-Clock 92 0.783 72 34.8% 43.5% 7 18 38.9% 5 11 45.5% 12 40 30.0% 12 16 75.0% 14 15.2% 17 8 3 6
Trent Forrest Mid-Clock 90 0.678 61 50.0% 51.2% 18 33 54.5% 2 4 50.0% 1 5 20.0% 18 24 75.0% 24 26.7% 35 11 3 21
CJ Walker Mid-Clock 78 0.923 72 48.1% 60.6% 9 19 47.4% 3 5 60.0% 13 28 46.4% 9 12 75.0% 13 16.7% 21 10 2 9
PJ Savoy Mid-Clock 51 1.000 51 31.9% 46.8% 0 1 0.0% 1 4 25.0% 14 42 33.3% 7 10 70.0% 10 19.6% 3 2 0 1
Christ Koumadje Mid-Clock 46 0.978 45 51.6% 51.6% 11 22 50.0% 5 9 55.6% 0 0 0.0% 13 19 68.4% 5 10.9% 3 2 1 0
Ike Obiagu Mid-Clock 22 1.045 23 60.0% 60.0% 7 12 58.3% 2 3 66.7% 0 0 0.0% 5 13 38.5% 6 27.3% 1 0 0 1
Brandon Allen Mid-Clock 9 0.556 5 66.7% 83.3% 1 1 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 2 50.0% 0 0 0.0% 6 66.7% 1 0 0 1

Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Mid-Clock Total

800

1.010

808

48.3%

57.2%

142

225

63.1%

45

127

35.4%

109

261

41.8%

107

168

63.7%

110

13.8%

171

52

18

101

Charles Matthews Mid-Clock 147 1.014 149 54.2% 58.4% 33 48 68.8% 16 35 45.7% 9 24 37.5% 24 39 61.5% 25 17.0% 36 7 2 27
Moritz Wagner Mid-Clock 136 1.081 147 48.3% 56.3% 32 51 62.7% 7 20 35.0% 19 49 38.8% 12 20 60.0% 17 12.5% 12 4 0 8
Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman Mid-Clock 135 0.985 133 41.7% 51.4% 17 38 44.7% 7 23 30.4% 21 47 44.7% 22 28 78.6% 8 5.9% 30 7 1 22
Duncan Robinson Mid-Clock 85 1.376 117 48.1% 64.9% 7 12 58.3% 4 9 44.4% 26 56 46.4% 17 20 85.0% 4 4.7% 11 5 3 3
Zavier Simpson Mid-Clock 78 0.654 51 50.0% 53.6% 17 26 65.4% 1 3 33.3% 3 13 23.1% 6 15 40.0% 19 24.4% 29 8 4 17
Jordan Poole Mid-Clock 48 1.000 48 42.9% 55.7% 4 4 100.0% 2 9 22.2% 9 22 40.9% 9 11 81.8% 6 12.5% 11 4 1 6
Jon Teske Mid-Clock 42 0.976 41 51.9% 51.9% 11 16 68.8% 3 11 27.3% 0 0 0.0% 13 23 56.5% 5 11.9% 7 2 2 3
Isaiah Livers Mid-Clock 32 1.281 41 58.6% 70.7% 8 10 80.0% 2 5 40.0% 7 14 50.0% 0 1 0.0% 7 21.9% 5 2 0 3
Eli Brooks Mid-Clock 31 0.710 22 33.3% 43.8% 2 4 50.0% 1 3 33.3% 5 17 29.4% 1 2 50.0% 6 19.4% 10 6 1 3
Jaaron Simmons Mid-Clock 21 0.476 10 36.4% 40.9% 3 5 60.0% 0 2 0.0% 1 4 25.0% 1 5 20.0% 5 23.8% 8 3 0 5
Xavier Simpson Mid-Clock 20 1.000 20 58.3% 83.3% 1 2 50.0% 0 1 0.0% 6 9 66.7% 0 0 0.0% 3 15.0% 10 4 2 4
Ibi Watson Mid-Clock 15 1.267 19 57.1% 67.9% 3 4 75.0% 2 5 40.0% 3 5 60.0% 0 1 0.0% 2 13.3% 2 0 2 0


Mid-Clock

Michigan: 33.2% O, 41.8% D

Florida State: 38.4% O, 37.8% D

  • Charles Matthews led the team in points in the mid-clock offense with 149 points. Mathews shot 69% at the rim, but 46% on 35 mid-range jumpers, 61% at the line and 25 turnovers (17%)
  • Moritz Wagner finished as the second leading scorer, managing to shoot 63% at the rim on 51 attempts and 39% from deep on 39 attempts.
  • Wagner, Abdur-Rahkman and Robinson each hit at least 19 threes in the mid-clock interval with Robinson leading with 26. By comparison, Phil Cofer is the only Seminole to hit more than 15, with 25/53 shooting (47.2% and 70.8% eFG%).
  • FSU did have at least four guys with at least a dozen makes from distance (Savoy, CJ Walker and MJ being the others). That is important because at least teams are not able to sag closer to the paint to narrow driving lanes.
  • Trent Forrest led the team with 24 turnovers a 26.7% TO%, but also managing 21 three point assists and 35 total assists. Braian Angola led the team with 38 assists (16 at the rim, 16 at the 3 point line)
  • Mfiondu Kabengele went 22/29 at the rim his only blemishes were his lackluster performance in mid-range shooting and 51.3% shooting at the line (on 39 attempts)
Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Late Clock Total

648

0.941

610

45.0%

51.9%

109

198

55.1%

39

108

36.1%

66

170

38.8%

116

164

70.7%

97

15.0%

105

42

9

54

Braian Angola Late Clock 117 0.906 106 41.0% 51.8% 8 19 42.1% 8 13 61.5% 18 51 35.3% 20 25 80.0% 22 18.8% 24 12 3 9
Terance Mann Late Clock 102 0.912 93 48.0% 50.0% 25 40 62.5% 8 21 38.1% 3 14 21.4% 18 24 75.0% 15 14.7% 17 8 0 9
Phil Cofer Late Clock 97 1.206 117 47.3% 56.6% 17 27 63.0% 9 21 42.9% 17 43 39.5% 14 19 73.7% 14 14.4% 7 1 2 4
Trent Forrest Late Clock 72 0.611 44 33.3% 34.5% 10 26 38.5% 3 11 27.3% 1 5 20.0% 15 19 78.9% 5 6.9% 27 8 4 15
CJ Walker Late Clock 69 0.797 55 40.4% 50.0% 10 18 55.6% 0 7 0.0% 9 22 40.9% 8 14 57.1% 8 11.6% 13 6 0 7
Mfiondu Kabengele Late Clock 62 0.774 48 31.6% 34.2% 9 21 42.9% 1 13 7.7% 2 4 50.0% 22 31 71.0% 9 14.5% 3 0 0 3
M.J. Walker Late Clock 49 1.245 61 51.2% 63.4% 7 14 50.0% 4 9 44.4% 10 18 55.6% 9 12 75.0% 7 14.3% 8 5 0 3
Christ Koumadje Late Clock 31 1.355 42 69.2% 69.2% 15 21 71.4% 3 5 60.0% 0 0 0.0% 6 9 66.7% 5 16.1% 0 0 0 0
PJ Savoy Late Clock 23 1.043 24 47.1% 64.7% 0 2 0.0% 2 4 50.0% 6 11 54.5% 2 3 66.7% 2 8.7% 2 1 0 1
Ike Obiagu Late Clock 18 0.778 14 54.5% 54.5% 6 8 75.0% 0 3 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 2 8 25.0% 6 33.3% 0 0 0 0
Brandon Allen Late Clock 5 0.800 4 66.7% 66.7% 1 1 100.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 1 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 2 40.0% 3 0 0 3

Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Late Clock Total

995

0.971

966

44.1%

51.7%

179

298

60.1%

53

178

29.8%

123

329

37.4%

133

200

66.5%

100

10.1%

174

56

15

103

Charles Matthews Late Clock 206 0.859 177 41.6% 46.4% 33 59 55.9% 16 51 31.4% 15 44 34.1% 34 56 60.7% 33 16.0% 30 13 4 13
Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman Late Clock 180 1.039 187 45.6% 55.1% 29 45 64.4% 10 32 31.3% 28 70 40.0% 25 32 78.1% 5 2.8% 40 8 2 30
Moritz Wagner Late Clock 168 1.298 218 52.1% 59.2% 56 82 68.3% 8 29 27.6% 24 58 41.4% 18 32 56.3% 15 8.9% 9 1 0 8
Zavier Simpson Late Clock 127 0.677 86 37.4% 43.4% 18 37 48.6% 5 16 31.3% 11 38 28.9% 7 15 46.7% 13 10.2% 38 16 1 21
Duncan Robinson Late Clock 77 1.013 78 41.3% 53.2% 9 15 60.0% 2 5 40.0% 15 43 34.9% 11 11 100.0% 8 10.4% 14 3 3 8
Jordan Poole Late Clock 61 1.082 66 40.0% 53.0% 4 9 44.4% 3 10 30.0% 13 31 41.9% 13 15 86.7% 4 6.6% 5 1 1 3
Jon Teske Late Clock 48 1.042 50 52.8% 52.8% 14 23 60.9% 5 13 38.5% 0 0 0.0% 12 19 63.2% 3 6.3% 5 0 1 4
Xavier Simpson Late Clock 34 0.941 32 52.0% 56.0% 9 14 64.3% 2 5 40.0% 2 6 33.3% 4 6 66.7% 4 11.8% 7 3 1 3
Isaiah Livers Late Clock 31 0.903 28 37.5% 52.1% 1 3 33.3% 1 7 14.3% 7 14 50.0% 3 5 60.0% 7 22.6% 8 3 2 3
Eli Brooks Late Clock 27 0.407 11 23.5% 32.4% 0 1 0.0% 1 4 25.0% 3 12 25.0% 0 1 0.0% 4 14.8% 8 2 0 6
Jaaron Simmons Late Clock 15 0.533 8 18.2% 27.3% 0 2 0.0% 0 3 0.0% 2 6 33.3% 2 2 100.0% 3 20.0% 8 4 0 4
Ibi Watson Late Clock 11 0.818 9 28.6% 42.9% 0 0 0.0% 0 2 0.0% 2 5 40.0% 3 4 75.0% 1 9.1% 1 1 0 0

Late Clock

Michigan: 41.3% O, 33.1% D

Florida State: 29.0% O, 34.8% D

  • Moritz Wagner is one of Michigan’s safety valves in the late clock offense thanks to his 41.4% shooting from deep and 68.3% shooting at the rim, good for a total of 218 points (1.298 PPP)
  • Zavier Simpson is not one of their go to scorers, but he is a facilitator for the Wolverines, dishing for 21 treys and 16 layups at the rim, finishing second in assists in the late clock.
  • Abdur-Rahkman was outstanding in this frame, shooting 64.4% at the rim, 40% beyond the arc, and 78% at the line with just 5 turnovers (2.8%). That young man is doing his best to live up to that name with those kinds of numbers.
  • Phil Cofer leads the Seminoles in late clock points (120 on 97 possessions, 1.206 PPP), thanks in part to 17/43 (39.5%, 59.2% eFG%) shooting on late clock 3pt shots (Angola had 18)
  • Braian Angola led the team in turnovers with 22 (to 24 assists, 33 points created + 106 scored = 139 points he was involved in), but Trent Forrest was stellar in this time frame, picking up 27 assists (15 3pt assists, 8 at the rim) to just 5 turnovers (42 points created off assists + 44 points scored = 86 points he was involved in)
Team by Time Interval Rebound Type P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Total

353

1.122

396

53.7%

59.8%

99

163

60.7%

13

41

31.7%

33

66

50.0%

73

108

67.6%

30

8.5%

44

30.3%

16

2

26

Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked Rim 24 1.167 28 50.0% 61.1% 4 8 50.0% 1 4 25.0% 4 6 66.7% 6 9 66.7% 2 8.3% 6 66.7% 1 1 4
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 2ptJ 8 0.000 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 3 0.0% 0 3 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 1 0.0% 1 12.5% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 3pt 2 2.500 5 100.0% 125.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 100.0% 0 1 1
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed Rim 121 1.107 134 53.5% 57.6% 38 68 55.9% 7 17 41.2% 8 14 57.1% 20 33 60.6% 6 5.0% 11 20.8% 4 0 7
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 2ptJ 54 1.093 59 59.0% 62.8% 18 26 69.2% 2 3 66.7% 3 10 30.0% 10 15 66.7% 9 16.7% 5 21.7% 2 0 3
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 3pt 129 1.178 152 54.6% 62.4% 36 53 67.9% 2 13 15.4% 15 31 48.4% 31 43 72.1% 12 9.3% 18 34.0% 8 0 10
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed FT 10 1.600 16 66.7% 77.8% 3 4 75.0% 1 1 100.0% 2 4 50.0% 2 2 100.0% 0 0.0% 3 50.0% 1 1 1
Offensive
Rebound
After Dead Ball Rebound 5 0.800 4 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 4 5 80.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0

Opponents of Florida State

Total

356

0.978

348

46.2%

51.1%

65

133

48.9%

31

59

52.5%

26

72

36.1%

78

106

73.6%

40

11.2%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked Rim 45 0.822 37 39.5% 43.4% 8 21 38.1% 4 5 80.0% 3 12 25.0% 4 5 80.0% 5 11.1% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 2ptJ 16 0.563 9 25.0% 29.2% 0 0 0.0% 2 5 40.0% 1 7 14.3% 2 2 100.0% 3 18.8% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 3pt 3 0.667 2 33.3% 33.3% 1 1 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 2 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed Rim 102 1.098 112 54.9% 58.5% 28 52 53.8% 6 10 60.0% 5 9 55.6% 29 38 76.3% 12 11.8% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 2ptJ 73 1.014 74 48.1% 54.6% 12 27 44.4% 7 13 53.8% 7 14 50.0% 15 21 71.4% 9 12.3% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 3pt 104 0.962 100 42.5% 48.1% 14 29 48.3% 11 25 44.0% 9 26 34.6% 23 31 74.2% 10 9.6% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed FT 9 1.222 11 66.7% 75.0% 2 3 66.7% 1 1 100.0% 1 2 50.0% 2 4 50.0% 1 11.1% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Dead Ball Rebound 4 0.750 3 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 3 5 60.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Team by Time Interval Rebound Type P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Total

301

1.183

356

55.9%

63.1%

80

121

66.1%

18

34

52.9%

34

81

42.0%

58

80

72.5%

31

10.3%

46

34.8%

9

6

31

Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked Rim 36 0.861 31 40.0% 48.3% 5 13 38.5% 2 2 100.0% 5 15 33.3% 2 6 33.3% 4 11.1% 7 58.3% 1 1 5
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 2ptJ 6 0.833 5 40.0% 40.0% 1 2 50.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 2 0.0% 1 2 50.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 3pt 2 2.500 5 100.0% 125.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 100.0% 0 1 1
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed Rim 61 1.311 80 64.2% 67.0% 29 36 80.6% 2 2 100.0% 3 15 20.0% 9 15 60.0% 2 3.3% 3 8.8% 0 0 3
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 2ptJ 44 1.273 56 58.5% 67.1% 11 21 52.4% 6 9 66.7% 7 11 63.6% 1 2 50.0% 3 6.8% 12 50.0% 3 3 6
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 3pt 142 1.176 167 55.4% 63.9% 34 48 70.8% 5 18 27.8% 17 35 48.6% 38 48 79.2% 19 13.4% 21 37.5% 5 0 16
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed FT 10 1.200 12 50.0% 62.5% 0 1 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 1 2 50.0% 7 7 100.0% 3 30.0% 1 50.0% 0 1 0

Opponents of Michigan

Total

304

1.023

311

52.4%

55.3%

85

128

66.4%

20

50

40.0%

13

47

27.7%

62

89

69.7%

37

12.2%

30

25.4%

14

5

Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked Rim 29 1.034 30 50.0% 54.5% 8 8 100.0% 1 8 12.5% 2 6 33.3% 6 9 66.7% 3 10.3% 2 18.2% 0 0 2
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 2ptJ 8 0.875 7 60.0% 60.0% 2 3 66.7% 1 1 100.0% 0 1 0.0% 1 4 25.0% 1 12.5% 0 0.0% 0 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Blocked 3pt 0 0.000 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed Rim 78 1.179 92 55.6% 57.1% 29 48 60.4% 4 10 40.0% 2 5 40.0% 20 28 71.4% 3 3.8% 10 28.6% 7 1 2
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 2ptJ 100 0.930 93 48.0% 52.0% 22 35 62.9% 8 20 40.0% 6 20 30.0% 15 21 71.4% 15 15.0% 9 25.0% 2 2 5
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed 3pt 80 0.988 79 53.7% 55.6% 22 32 68.8% 5 9 55.6% 2 13 15.4% 19 25 76.0% 13 16.3% 8 27.6% 5 1 2
Offensive
Rebound
After Missed FT 9 1.111 10 66.7% 75.0% 2 2 100.0% 1 2 50.0% 1 2 50.0% 1 2 50.0% 2 22.2% 1 25.0% 0 1 0

Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Florida State

Offensive Rebound
Total

304

1.089

331

51.3%

57.7%

75

129

58.1%

12

38

31.6%

29

59

49.2%

70

105

66.7%

27

8.9%

41

14

2

25

Terance Mann Offensive Rebound 58 1.224 71 57.1% 59.2% 23 35 65.7% 3 9 33.3% 2 5 40.0% 13 16 81.3% 3 5.2% 9 3 0 6
Phil Cofer Offensive Rebound 44 1.114 49 50.0% 55.6% 12 19 63.2% 2 6 33.3% 4 11 36.4% 9 12 75.0% 3 6.8% 3 1 0 2
Braian Angola Offensive Rebound 39 0.974 38 43.3% 58.3% 3 7 42.9% 1 4 25.0% 9 19 47.4% 3 4 75.0% 7 17.9% 9 2 1 6
Mfiondu Kabengele Offensive Rebound 36 0.972 35 43.5% 45.7% 9 17 52.9% 0 5 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 14 22 63.6% 3 8.3% 0 0 0 0
Trent Forrest Offensive Rebound 35 1.029 36 56.3% 59.4% 8 12 66.7% 0 2 0.0% 1 2 50.0% 17 22 77.3% 3 8.6% 9 3 1 5
Christ Koumadje Offensive Rebound 28 1.143 32 57.1% 57.1% 10 18 55.6% 2 3 66.7% 0 0 0.0% 8 13 61.5% 1 3.6% 1 1 0 0
CJ Walker Offensive Rebound 22 1.091 24 47.4% 60.5% 3 7 42.9% 1 4 25.0% 5 8 62.5% 1 3 33.3% 2 9.1% 3 1 0 2
M.J. Walker Offensive Rebound 17 1.118 19 42.9% 53.6% 2 5 40.0% 1 2 50.0% 3 7 42.9% 4 4 100.0% 1 5.9% 6 3 0 3
Ike Obiagu Offensive Rebound 14 0.786 11 62.5% 62.5% 5 8 62.5% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 9 11.1% 2 14.3% 0 0 0 0
PJ Savoy Offensive Rebound 10 1.600 16 60.0% 80.0% 0 1 0.0% 2 3 66.7% 4 6 66.7% 0 0 0.0% 1 10.0% 0 0 0 0
Brandon Allen Offensive Rebound 1 0.00 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 1 100.0% 1 0 0 1
Players by
Time Interval
Time Interval P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)

Michigan

Offensive Rebound

Total

258

1.205

311

56.9%

64.5%

66

101

65.3%

16

31

51.6%

30

65

46.2%

57

79

72.2%

27

10.5%

43

9

6

28

Charles Matthews Offensive Rebound 47 0.830 39 45.7% 47.1% 13 24 54.2% 2 5 40.0% 1 6 16.7% 6 9 66.7% 4 8.5% 7 3 1 3
Moritz Wagner Offensive Rebound 42 1.524 64 71.4% 77.1% 18 23 78.3% 3 4 75.0% 4 8 50.0% 10 16 62.5% 3 7.1% 3 1 0 2
Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman Offensive Rebound 32 1.563 50 69.2% 80.8% 8 9 88.9% 4 7 57.1% 6 10 60.0% 8 10 80.0% 4 12.5% 9 1 0 8
Jon Teske Offensive Rebound 30 1.033 31 57.1% 57.1% 9 15 60.0% 3 6 50.0% 0 0 0.0% 7 11 63.6% 2 6.7% 4 0 1 3
Zavier Simpson Offensive Rebound 25 0.680 17 42.9% 53.6% 1 5 20.0% 2 2 100.0% 3 7 42.9% 2 6 33.3% 5 20.0% 6 0 1 5
Duncan Robinson Offensive Rebound 20 1.950 39 57.9% 76.3% 3 5 60.0% 1 1 100.0% 7 13 53.8% 10 10 100.0% 1 5.0% 0 0 0 0
Jordan Poole Offensive Rebound 15 1.000 15 37.5% 50.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 1 0.0% 2 6 33.3% 7 7 100.0% 2 13.3% 3 0 1 2
Isaiah Livers Offensive Rebound 15 1.133 17 50.0% 60.7% 4 6 66.7% 0 1 0.0% 3 7 42.9% 0 1 0.0% 2 13.3% 4 1 2 1
Austin Davis Offensive Rebound 8 1.500 12 66.7% 66.7% 6 8 75.0% 0 1 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0
Ibi Watson Offensive Rebound 7 1.286 9 40.0% 60.0% 0 1 0.0% 0 1 0.0% 2 3 66.7% 3 4 75.0% 0 0.0% 1 1 0 0
Xavier Simpson Offensive Rebound 7 1.571 11 75.0% 87.5% 1 2 50.0% 1 1 100.0% 1 1 100.0% 4 4 100.0% 1 14.3% 1 0 0 1

Offensive Rebounds

Michigan: 11.2% O, 11.3% D

Florida State: 13.7% O, 13.7% D

  • Michigan gathered 97 of their 301 offensive rebounds on shots at the rim (243 missed rim attempts, 40% recovery rate) and 142 of 561 missed 3pt attempts (26% recovery rate, or 48% of all Michigan offensive rebounds.)
  • Michigan did not bring in offensive rebounds at a very high rate, but when they did, they found exceptionally efficient shots, with 66.1% shooting at the rim and 42% from 3 (63% eFG%, 31 of 34 assisted)
  • FSU gathered 29.8% of their missed 3pt attempts (or 41% of all FSU offensive rebounds came off missed shots from deep
  • FSU Gathered 43.6% of their missed shots at the rim (or 37% of all FSU offensive rebounds came off missed shots at the rim)
  • Terance Mann Led the Seminoles with 71 points on offensive rebound possessions, thanks in large part to 65.7% shooting at the rim, hitting a couple clutch three pointers, and a much needed 13/16 performance (81.3%) at the line.
  • Mfiondu Kabengele may be one of the best offensive rebounders out right now with the way he's been pulling them down. Watching him play, it is easy to see his potential.


Possessions by Possession Start

(After Opponent Score, Defensive Rebound, Deadball Turnover, or Steal)

Teams by
Possession Type
P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)
Florida State 2233 1.094 2443 46.3% 52.4% 514 846 60.8% 122 349 35.0% 225 664 33.9% 496 726 68.3% 400 17.9% 448 52.0% 224 38 186
After Opponent
Scores
998 1.084 1082 44.6% 51.0% 204 355 57.5% 64 176 36.4% 106 307 34.5% 228 345 66.1% 190 19.0% 183 48.9% 77 19 87
After Defensive
Rebounds
799 1.046 836 44.5% 51.0% 166 280 59.3% 36 106 34.0% 83 254 32.7% 183 250 73.2% 137 17.1% 154 54.0% 73 13 68
After Steals 215 1.400 301 62.2% 66.3% 96 123 78.0% 8 21 38.1% 16 49 32.7% 45 67 67.2% 24 11.2% 66 55.0% 51 3 12
After Dead Ball
Turnovers
221 0.982 217 44.0% 49.5% 46 86 53.5% 14 44 31.8% 20 52 38.5% 37 61 60.7% 49 22.2% 44 55.0% 22 3 19
Opponents of
Florida State
2238 1.024 2291 42.4% 49.2% 367 728 50.4% 174 452 38.5% 255 698 36.5% 444 621 71.5% 436 19.5% 380 47.7% 145 42 193
After Opponent
Scores
1086 0.993 1078 41.3% 48.1% 153 324 47.2% 95 247 38.5% 123 328 37.5% 213 303 70.3% 216 19.9% 176 47.4% 60 24 92
After Defensive
Rebounds
751 1.051 789 42.8% 49.9% 127 252 50.4% 58 151 38.4% 93 247 37.7% 140 199 70.4% 128 17.0% 138 49.6% 52 14 72
After Steals 177 1.153 204 50.4% 55.8% 49 77 63.6% 6 13 46.2% 15 49 30.6% 49 64 76.6% 39 22.0% 32 45.7% 20 1 11
After Dead Ball
Turnovers
224 0.942 211 40.4% 46.5% 38 75 50.7% 15 41 36.6% 23 72 31.9% 36 48 75.0% 52 23.2% 33 43.4% 13 3 17
Teams by
Possession Type
P
o
s
s
P
P
P
Pts FG
%
eFG
%
Rim Made Rim Att Rim % 2ptJ Made 2ptJ Att 2ptJ % 3pt Made 3pt Att 3pt
%
FTM FTA FT
%
TO TO
%
Ast
(Tot)
Ast
%
Ast
(Rim)
Ast (2ptJ) Ast (3pt)
Michigan 2376 1.129 2682 46.9% 54.8% 522 806 64.8% 119 370 32.2% 326 887 36.8% 422 637 66.2% 325 13.7% 527 54.5% 206 37 284
After Opponent
Scores
1033 1.127 1164 46.7% 54.9% 206 332 62.0% 65 184 35.3% 146 377 38.7% 184 282 65.2% 146 14.1% 209 50.1% 66 19 124
After Defensive
Rebounds
884 1.110 981 46.8% 54.9% 199 297 67.0% 34 117 29.1% 122 344 35.5% 149 230 64.8% 123 13.9% 206 58.0% 84 13 109
After Steals 221 1.226 271 51.5% 57.9% 67 102 65.7% 9 23 39.1% 25 71 35.2% 44 56 78.6% 28 12.7% 58 57.4% 35 2 21
After Dead Ball
Turnovers
238 1.088 259 43.6% 51.2% 49 73 67.1% 11 46 23.9% 32 92 34.8% 43 67 64.2% 27 11.3% 53 57.6% 21 3 29
Opponents of
Michigan
2380 0.974 2317 43.1% 48.2% 450 779 57.8% 197 584 33.7% 198 596 33.2% 429 600 71.5% 458 19.2% 379 44.9% 178 54 147
After Opponent
Scores
1169 0.962 1124 42.7% 47.6% 215 385 55.8% 106 294 36.1% 94 292 32.2% 200 265 75.5% 232 19.8% 181 43.6% 76 32 73
After Defensive
Rebounds
884 0.957 846 42.3% 47.2% 157 267 58.8% 72 212 34.0% 70 228 30.7% 178 260 68.5% 162 18.3% 129 43.1% 64 16 49
After Steals 146 1.014 148 45.5% 50.0% 36 55 65.5% 8 35 22.9% 11 31 35.5% 27 39 69.2% 27 18.5% 24 43.6% 16 0 8
After Dead Ball
Turnovers
181 1.072 194 48.1% 55.1% 42 71 59.2% 11 43 25.6% 22 42 52.4% 22 34 64.7% 33 18.2% 44 58.7% 22 6 16

  • A rim heavy offense (39% of all attempts, 64.8% FG%) at Michigan has decided to play against FSU (42% of all attempts, 60.8% FG%). If you want to take the ball to the hoop against FSU (50.4% Rim FG% allowed, 57.8% allowed for Michigan), you're gonna have a bad time.
  • While FSU shoots 68% at the line, Michigan is somehow a little worse with 66.2% shooting at the FT line. If the game turns into a whistle fest this could be a real problem in either direction.

  • Michigan does not often use the quick transition attack after their opponents have just scored, but when they do the Wolverines have averaged well over 1.000 PPP. After a made 3 point shot by their opponent, 40% of Michigan’s field goal attempts are 3 point attempts where they shot 43.8% (65.7% eFG%) and averaged 1.201 PPP after opponent made three pointers.
  • Florida State has used the quick transition attack on roughly 20% of possessions following opponent scores managing to shoot 55.3% eFG% but only .960 PPP. After opponent makes from beyond the arc, 39.5% of the Seminoles field goal attempts were also three pointers, where they shot 22.7% (34.1% eFG%) and averaged .759 PPP after opponent made three pointers.

  • Corners are especially hot for Michigan on defensive rebounds, an area where FSU's defense has also struggled when shooters are capable of making you pay.
  • After defensive rebounds of missed shots at the rim, Michigan possessions are classified as transition 54.5% of the time (overall transition: 25.3%).
  • On the season, Michigan has recovered 62.2% of their 98 blocks.
  • After defensive rebounds of missed shots at the rim, Florida State possessions are classified as transition 52.1% of the time (overall transition: 36.7%)
  • 85 of FSU’s 149 blocks or 57% were recovered by the Seminoles (in 31 games for FSU to Michigan’s 36 that are in my database.)

  • In Losses, Michigan has allowed teams to shoot 67% at the rim, including 83% at the rim in transition (on 25% transition possessions allowed). Overall, teams shot 60.1% eFG% (45.5% from 3, or 68.3% eFG%) against the Wolverines in Michigan losses, all yielding 1.211 points per possession.
  • Michigan suffered 9 momentum killing sequences of a Missed 3pt followed by a made 3 pointer by their opponent in 7 losses. When you are dealing with as few possessions as Michigan is, that effect is magnified.
  • In FSU losses, there were 12 such sequences of a missed 3 pointer followed by a made 3 pointer by the Seminoles’ opponent in 10 losses. The Florida State defense allowed 0.972 PPP and 39.3% shooting from distance in losses (59.0% eFG%.)
  • FSU allowed their opponents a 33.7% free throw rate in losses.

Here's what I see, you can try to take shots on the right hand side of the rim against FSU. You can also eat tide pods. Neither is advisable.

The Wolverines have to prevent Florida State from breaking down their defense and from scoring at the rim without fouling and allowing a bunch of offensive rebounds.

The Big 10 is one of the slowest paced conferences out there, with only the dregs of the conference approaching 70 possessions a game.

If you successfully get out in transition early and build if not a lead, at least a sense of anxiety from the Wolverines that 65 points won't cut it in this game, the pace of the game will favor FSU's rotation.

Most teams have not been successful at turning Michigan over, but you can actually offensive rebound against them, I'm betting due to their conference style of play, fewer teams aggressively pursue offensive rebounds.

I predict FSU's bigs are fairly successful at limiting play around the rim, but a senior forward leads his team to victory. I've got Noles by 1, but I do not trust what I'm seeing from this Big 10 data, they bake in so much variability with that low of a number of possessions as a conference.

You can follow me on twitter:

Fanposts are a section for the fans and do NOT reflect the views of Tomahawk Nation.